Prognostics driven decision making

ABSTRACT

Systems and methods include monitoring a health of at least one asset. A remaining useful life (RUL) of the at least one asset is estimated based on the monitoring. The RUL of the asset is categorized into categories comprising shorter than a time to complete a current mission and longer than the time to complete the current mission. One or more remedial actions are automatically performed during the current mission if the RUL is categorized as being less than the time to complete the current mission. The remedial actions comprise one or more of initiating a fail-safe mode, adapting a controller of the one or more assets, reconfiguration of the system, and adjusting the current mission of the one or more assets. Maintenance is scheduled for after the current mission of the at least one asset if the RUL is categorized as being greater than or equal to the time to complete the current mission.

BACKGROUND

Prognostic estimation can be useful to estimate the remaining usefullife of various types of equipment. Remaining useful life estimatesallow equipment operators to make informed decisions about determiningappropriate remedial actions

SUMMARY

Embodiments involve a method comprising monitoring a health of at leastone asset. A remaining useful life (RUL) of the at least one asset isestimated based on the monitoring. The RUL of the asset is categorizedinto categories comprising shorter than a time to complete a currentmission and longer than the time to complete the current mission. One ormore remedial actions are automatically performed during the currentmission if the RUL is categorized as being less than the time tocomplete the current mission. The remedial actions comprise one or moreof initiating a fail-safe mode, adapting a controller of the one or moreassets, reconfiguration of the system, and adjusting the current missionof the one or more assets. Maintenance is scheduled for after thecurrent mission of the at least one asset if the RUL is categorized asbeing greater than or equal to the time to complete the current mission.

Embodiments involve a system, comprising a processor and a memorystoring computer program instructions which when executed by theprocessor cause the processor to perform operations. The operationscomprise monitoring a health of at least one asset. A remaining usefullife (RUL) of the at least one asset is estimated based on themonitoring. The RUL of the asset is categorized into categoriescomprising shorter than a time to complete a current mission and longerthan the time to complete the current mission. One or more remedialactions are automatically performed during the current mission if theRUL is categorized as being less than the time to complete the currentmission. The remedial actions comprise one or more of initiating afail-safe mode, adapting a controller of the one or more assets,reconfiguration of the system, and adjusting the current mission of theone or more assets. Maintenance is scheduled for after the currentmission of the at least one asset if the RUL is categorized as beinggreater than or equal to the time to complete the current mission.

Embodiments involve a non-transitory computer readable medium storingcomputer program instructions, the computer program instructions whenexecuted by a processor cause the processor to perform operations. Theoperations comprise monitoring a health of at least one asset. Aremaining useful life (RUL) of the at least one asset is estimated basedon the monitoring. The RUL of the asset is categorized into categoriescomprising shorter than a time to complete a current mission and longerthan the time to complete the current mission. One or more remedialactions are automatically performed during the current mission if theRUL is categorized as being less than the time to complete the currentmission. The remedial actions comprise one or more of initiating afail-safe mode, adapting a controller of the one or more assets,reconfiguration of the system, and adjusting the current mission of theone or more assets. Maintenance is scheduled for after the currentmission of the at least one asset if the RUL is categorized as beinggreater than or equal to the time to complete the current mission.

The above summary is not intended to describe each embodiment or everyimplementation. A more complete understanding will become apparent andappreciated by referring to the following detailed description andclaims in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates a method for determining one or more remedial actionsto take based on the RUL in accordance with the embodiments describedherein;

FIG. 2 shows a more detailed flow diagram for determining one or moreremedial actions to take based on the RUL in accordance with theembodiments described herein;

FIG. 3 shows an example results of a simulation of a hypothetical assetwith ten subsystems/components that fail at various times with differentRUL values in accordance with the embodiments described herein;

FIG. 4 shows a more detailed view on a component by component basiswhere each component is represented by a RUL and an operationalcondition in accordance with the embodiments described herein;

FIG. 5 shows a block diagram of a system capable of implementingembodiments described herein.

The figures are not necessarily to scale. Like numbers used in thefigures refer to like components. However, it will be understood thatthe use of a number to refer to a component in a given figure is notintended to limit the component in another figure labeled with the samenumber.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The approaches described herein relate to the field of makingpredictions based on a remaining useful life (RUL) for some type ofcomponent, e.g., pump, valve, transformer, engine, medical system,structural member, battery, etc. All equipment undergoes degradation andwill eventually fail, if no remedial action is being taken. Suchpredictions are particularly important in the field of Prescriptivemaintenance (R×M) where this predictive information is used to providethe decision that ensures minimal operational disruption, thereby savingcost compared to unscheduled, reactive maintenance. For example, if thepredicted RUL (i.e., the time to failure) is just a few millisecondsaway, scheduling maintenance may not be the appropriate response.Instead, the system may be configured to reflexively protect itself andthen deal with restoring functionality later. However, if the prognosisis that the asset will fail in 3 weeks, for example, then there may beenough time to put in motion a maintenance action that helps toremediate the problem. Embodiments described herein involve determiningone or more actions to take based on the predicted RUL.

A system can have many subsystems and components that are used in amission to carry out their respective function. They experiencedegradation based on usage and may furthermore experience faults whichis manifested as a sudden change in the subsystem's or component'shealth trajectory. These faults have a stochastic nature and can happenat any time. The prior probability of fault occurrence is typicallyknown, but not the time at which they occur. The remaining life dropsfaster when a fault is present compared to when no fault is present.Depending on the nature of the fault, and the time to failure (which theprognostics estimates as remaining useful life), different action shouldbe taken. If the fault causes RUL to drop to a point where failure isimminent, the system may reflexively protect itself and go intofail-safe mode. This may come at the expense of operational readinessbut safeguards the larger mission goals. The system may be configured toreturn the asset to full status if possible with appropriate remedialaction. Such remedial action may include maintenance.

If RUL is larger than the point that failure is imminent, but still doesnot allow for maintenance action, then, depending on the prognostichorizon, system reconfiguration may be appropriate. Systemreconfiguration may involve using directly or indirectly redundantsubsystems that can at least partially restore operational capability.Reconfiguration can be accomplished for various types of systems,including, mechanical, electrical, or other types. The degree to whichthis type of reconfiguration can be accomplished depends on themodularity and the architecture of the system. For complex systems,finding partial and indirect redundancies may be found be examining alarge number of potential configurations and compare the expectedfunction.

Another feasible reconfiguration may be controller adaptation.Controller adaptation can involve changes of gains or changing othercontroller settings. It has the goal of relieving some stress on thecomponent and should ideally result in restoration of some extra life.Finding the appropriate settings can be a complicated task, depending onthe complexity of the controls. One way to address this task is toexplore different controls settings from a bank of controllers. Anotherway would be to carry out an optimization of controls settings where theobjective function encapsulates the restoration of remaining life aswell as meeting mission objectives, amongst other things. Larger RUL mayallow modification of mission plans to address the lack of availabilityof a particular subsystem (which may be temporary). Replanning orrescheduling of tasks is a search or optimization problem and typicallyrequires more time, depending on the complexity of the overall mission.Mission replanning results in reduced use of the impaired component (ifmay be taken completely out of commission). If possible, the impairedcomponent should be repaired.

Finally, if RUL is even larger, maintenance can be scheduled whiletaking into consideration various operational and logistics constraints.Typically, many competing objectives need to be considered to optimallyaddress this task. This includes minimal impact on operationalobjectives, least costly repair, least downtime, best utilization ofrepair facilities, possible impact on secondary objectives (such as shoploading), etc.

Maintenance action is performed based on the recommendation of themaintenance optimization tool and—if no maintenance was recommended atthe time—based on criticality of the remaining life estimate. That is, acomponent may experience drop in remaining life even when no faultcaused a sudden drop. To prevent the component from failing, it may bescheduled to be fixed.

FIG. 1 illustrates a method for determining one or more remedial actionsto take based on the RUL in accordance with the embodiments describedherein. The health of at least one asset is monitored 110 via one ormore sensors, for example. According to various configurations, thehealth of the asset may be monitored continuously. In some cases, thehealth of the asset may be monitored at predetermined discreteintervals. According to various embodiments, the health of the asset maybe monitored based on a previously predicted RUL. According to variousimplementations, it may be determined if a fault of the one or moreassets has occurred based on the monitoring.

The RUL of the at least one asset may be estimated 120 based on themonitoring. For example, the RUL may be based on an estimate of thefuture damage to the component. The estimators may employ fundamentallydifferent approaches to provide the future damage estimates of thecomponent. For example, one or more estimators may operate from firstprinciples of the physics of the system and/or fault propagation forgiven operating and environmental conditions to provide the futuredamage estimates. Alternatively or additionally, one or more estimatorsmay operate from models based on empirical data gained throughperforming a number of experiments to provide the future damageestimates or from having collected trajectories of data relating to pastfailures. Predicting the RUL of an asset is described in more detail incommonly owned U.S. application Ser. No. 16/717,649, which is hereinincorporated by reference in its entirety.

The RUL of the at least one asset may be categorized 130 based on alength of the RUL. For example, the RUL may be categorized into a timeshorter than a time to complete a current mission and a time longer tocomplete the current mission. It is to be understood that the term“mission” can refer to a mission comprising subtasks and/or could beconsidered a subtask. In general, the mission is a goal driven activitywhich could be as diverse as the flight of an aircraft or the processingof materials in a manufacturing plant.

One or more remedial actions may be automatically performed 140 duringthe current mission if the RUL is categorized as being shorter than thetime to complete the current mission. Maintenance may be scheduled 150for after the current mission of the at least one asset if the RUL iscategorized as being longer than the time to complete the currentmission. According to embodiments described herein maintenance mayinclude any action that seeks to uphold or improve the health of anasset. For example, the maintenance may include one or more of repair,replacement, refurbishment, restoration, cleaning, lubrication, etc.

According to various embodiments, the one or more remedial actionscomprise one or more of initiating a fail-safe mode, adapting acontroller of the one or more assets (e.g., adjusting one or morecontroller settings), reconfiguration of the system and adjusting thecurrent mission of the one or more assets. According to variousconfigurations, adjusting the current mission includes replanning and/orrescheduling one or more mission tasks. Replanning the one or moremission tasks may include changing an order in which mission tasks arecompleted and/or eliminating one or more unnecessary mission tasks, forexample.

The RUL may be categorized into any number of categories. For example,the RUL may be categorized into a first, second, third, and fourthcategory. The RUL may be categorized into the first category ifremaining RUL is less than or equal to a first threshold, a secondcategory if remaining RUL is greater than the first threshold and lessthan or equal to a second threshold, categorizing the RUL of the atleast one asset into the third category if remaining RUL is greater thanthe second threshold and less than or equal to a third threshold, andcategorizing the RUL of the at least one asset into the fourth categoryif remaining RUL is greater than the third threshold. One or more of thefirst, second and third thresholds may be tunable based on a currentmission, for example. In some cases, one or more of the first, second,and third thresholds are set by a user. According to variousimplementations, at least one of the first, second, and third thresholdsare determined automatically based on the current mission and/or one ormore mission tasks.

FIG. 2 shows a more detailed flow diagram for determining one or moreremedial actions to take based on the RUL in accordance with theembodiments described herein. A systems health unit 201 monitors thehealth of an asset k, determines the presence of a fault, and estimates205 remaining life RUL_k. If it is determined 210 RUL_k is very small,say, RUL_k<t_critical, then the system may protect itself by going intofail-safe mode 212, for example. According to various implementations,the impact of the fail-safe mode on other operational goals is assessedand a plan for returning from fail-safe mode may be made. Such a planmay involve a maintenance action to repair and/or replace the item orother appropriate action. The fail-safe mode may be configured to tradeoff functionality of the faulted component with protection of othermission objectives. The fail-safe action disengages the remaining lifeclock and allows for more time to remediate the problem. One or morefail-safe objectives 215 may be considered. These objectives may bepre-compiled to allow to fastest protection in case of the fault. Shouldthe fault not be fixable, then the mission may be replanned to accountfor the loss of functionality imposed by the fault of the particularcomponent.

If it is determined 220 that the remaining life is still small, but notas small as t_critical, say, RUL_k<t_short, the system may be able toissue controller adaptation as a remedial action. According to variousembodiments, t_short is a tunable parameter based on operational andmission constraints), then the system may be able to issue controlleradaptation 222 as a remedial action. Controller adaptation in itself maybe a complicated task, based on the complexity of the asset and based onadaptation objectives 225 for the particular asset that in the contextof a controller are controls objectives. It can be framed as anoptimization problem that is subject to time constraints (namely RUL_k).The outcome of the controller adaptation is typically not fixing theproblem with the asset, but results in a life extension of the asset.The fault may still be addressed through maintenance, but the controlleradaptation buys additional time by shedding load from the faultedcomponent, for example.

Alternative to controller adaptation, system reconfiguration can be usedas a remedial action. System reconfiguration involves using directly orindirectly redundant subsystems that at least partially restoreoperational capability. Reconfiguration can be accomplished for varioustypes of systems, including, mechanical, electrical, or other types. Forcomplex systems, finding partial and indirect redundancies is found byexamining a large number of potential configurations and compare theexpected function and is framed as an optimization problem subject toadaptation objectives. In the context of the system reconfiguration, theadaptation objectives are an objective function that encapsulates theoperational capabilities of the system.

Again, if the problem is not fixable, the mission may be replanned toaccount for the loss of functionality of that particular component.

If it is determined 230 that the remaining time is larger still, but notlarge enough to allow for cost efficient and safe maintenance, (soRUL_k<t_mission, for example) then a mission replanning module 232 mayget triggered. This module 232 uses the mission objectives to assessoperational impairment in light of the faulted component. New missionplans are evaluated such as to maximize the mission objectives 235 withnew component availability and readiness. Such a planning activity is anoptimization task for which a large number of approaches exist,including various search algorithms and other task allocation algorithms(amongst others). Such an action allows for operations to continue in anoptimal fashion (given the available asset mix) while more permanentremediation is being pursued, possibly through maintenance and/orrepair.

Finally, if it is determined that RUL_k is even larger such thatRUL_k≥t_mission—and while other measures with shorter RUL_k have beeninvoked—the maintenance optimization module 242 is triggered. Here, theoptimal maintenance action is being evaluated while considering alsologistics objectives 245. It may be determined 250 if the asset and/orthe asset component is fixable. If it is determined 250 that the assetand/or the asset component is not fixable, the mission replanning module232 may be invoked. If it is determined 250 that the asset and/or theasset component is fixable, the asset and/or the asset component may bescheduled for maintenance 260 after completion of the current mission.

Determining the optimal maintenance action may be considerable,potentially reaching back to manufacturing of the item, but also needsto be seen in context of the needs of other assets, in particular in thefleet setting where more than one asset needs to be operated. In such acase, many demands on logistics will compete for resources with theasset at hand and the problem can be interpreted as a large scaledynamic multi-objective optimization problem. Again, many approaches tosolving this problem are available. The multi-objective nature of theproblem means that a plurality of solutions will be produced that stillnecessitates the down-select of a suitable solution. This is often timesdone in collaboration with human operators which employ non-encodedcontext constraints for the final solution. Alternatively oradditionally, the problem can be collapsed into a single-objectiveproblem by assigning weights to the different objectives. In that case,a unique solution can be found and pursued.

FIG. 3 shows an example result of simulation of a hypothetical assetwith k=10 subsystems/components that fail at various times withdifferent RUL_k. As can be observed, depending on the remaining time ofthe component, the result of the system's actions restores componenthealth after a fault, but not necessarily immediately. For example,subsystem 1 310 has a drop in RUL at time 312 and another drop in RUL attime 314. Subsystem 1 310 is then repaired at time 316. Subsystem 7 320has a large drop in RUL at time 322 before the any drops in RUL forSubsystem 1 310. Subsystem 2 320 does not get repaired until time 324,well after subsystem 1 310 has been repaired.

FIG. 4 shows a more detailed view on a component by component basiswhere each component is represented by a RUL (in blue) and anoperational condition. For illustrative purposes, the operationalcondition is zero if there is no fault. Note that the component maystill experience degradation, which is considered normal. Theoperational condition is “1” if the system has to go into fail-safemode. It is “2” if the system goes into controller adaptation mode andit is “3” if it goes into mission replanning mode, and it is “4” if itgoes into maintenance mode as shown in Table 1.

TABLE 1 Operational Modes Operational mode Code Normal 0 Fail-Safe Mode1 Controller Adaptation or System 2 Reconfiguration Mission Re-Planning3 Maintenance 4

As can be observed, different actions are taken for the differentsituations, reflecting the policies and objectives for the differentmodes and faults. The remedial actions taken may be dependent onpreferences that may be expressed in the various objectives for thedifferent components, namely fail-safe objective, controls objectives,mission objectives, and/or logistics objectives.

The above-described methods can be implemented on a computer usingwell-known computer processors, memory units, storage devices, computersoftware, and other components. A high-level block diagram of such acomputer is illustrated in FIG. 5. Computer 500 contains a processor510, which controls the overall operation of the computer 500 byexecuting computer program instructions which define such operation. Theprocessor may use sensor information obtained from one or more sensors.It is to be understood that the processor 510 can include any type ofdevice capable of executing instructions. For example, the processor 510may include one or more of a central processing unit (CPU), a graphicalprocessing unit (GPU), a field-programmable gate array (FPGA), and anapplication-specific integrated circuit (ASIC). The computer programinstructions may be stored in a storage device 520 (e.g., magnetic disk)and loaded into memory 530 when execution of the computer programinstructions is desired. Thus, the steps of the methods described hereinmay be defined by the computer program instructions stored in the memory530 and controlled by the processor 510 executing the computer programinstructions. According to various implementations, the computer mayperform method steps as part of an in-house server or cloud basedservice. The computer 500 may include one or more network interfaces 550for communicating with other devices via a network. The computer 500also includes other input/output devices 560 that enable userinteraction with the computer 500 (e.g., display, keyboard, mouse,speakers, buttons, etc.). According to various embodiments, FIG. 5 is ahigh level representation of possible components of a computer forillustrative purposes and the computer may contain other components.

Unless otherwise indicated, all numbers expressing feature sizes,amounts, and physical properties used in the specification and claimsare to be understood as being modified in all instances by the term“about.” Accordingly, unless indicated to the contrary, the numericalparameters set forth in the foregoing specification and attached claimsare approximations that can vary depending upon the desired propertiessought to be obtained by those skilled in the art utilizing theteachings disclosed herein. The use of numerical ranges by endpointsincludes all numbers within that range (e.g. 1 to 5 includes 1, 1.5, 2,2.75, 3, 3.80, 4, and 5) and any range within that range.

The various embodiments described above may be implemented usingcircuitry and/or software modules that interact to provide particularresults. One of skill in the computing arts can readily implement suchdescribed functionality, either at a modular level or as a whole, usingknowledge generally known in the art. For example, the flowchartsillustrated herein may be used to create computer-readableinstructions/code for execution by a processor. Such instructions may bestored on a computer-readable medium and transferred to the processorfor execution as is known in the art. The structures and proceduresshown above are only a representative example of embodiments that can beused to facilitate ink jet ejector diagnostics as described above. Theforegoing description of the example embodiments have been presented forthe purposes of illustration and description. It is not intended to beexhaustive or to limit the inventive concepts to the precise formdisclosed. Many modifications and variations are possible in light ofthe above teachings. Any or all features of the disclosed embodimentscan be applied individually or in any combination, not meant to belimiting but purely illustrative. It is intended that the scope belimited by the claims appended herein and not with the detaileddescription.

1. A method comprising: monitoring a health of at least one asset;estimating a remaining useful life (RUL) of the at least one asset basedon the monitoring; categorizing the RUL of the asset into categoriescomprising shorter than a time to complete a current mission and longerthan the time to complete the current mission; automatically performingone or more remedial actions during the current mission if the RUL iscategorized as being less than the time to complete the current mission,the one or more remedial actions selected from initiating a fail-safemode, adapting a controller of the one or more assets, reconfigurationof the system, and adjusting the current mission of the one or moreassets; and scheduling maintenance for after the current mission of theat least one asset if the RUL is categorized as being greater than orequal to the time to complete the current mission.
 2. The method ofclaim 1, further comprising: determining if a fault of the one or moreassets have occurred based on the monitoring; and categorizing the RULof the asset into categories based on the determination that a fault hasoccurred.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein categorizing the RUL intocategories comprises categorizing the RUL of the asset into at least afirst category, a second category, a third category and a fourthcategory based on the remaining RUL.
 4. The method of claim 3, whereincategorizing the RUL into categories comprises: categorizing the RUL ofthe at least one asset into the first category if remaining RUL is lessthan or equal to a first threshold; categorizing the RUL of the at leastone asset into the second category if remaining RUL is greater than thefirst threshold and less than or equal to a second threshold;categorizing the RUL of the at least one asset into the third categoryif remaining RUL is greater than the second threshold and less than orequal to a third threshold; and categorizing the RUL of the at least oneasset into the fourth category if remaining RUL is greater than thethird threshold.
 5. The method of claim 4, wherein at least one of thefirst threshold, the second threshold, and the third threshold aretunable.
 6. The method of claim 4, wherein the third threshold is basedon the time to complete the current mission.
 7. The method of claim 4,further comprising: initiating a fail-safe mode if the RUL iscategorized as being in the first category; adapting a controller of theone or more assets if the RUL is categorized as being in the secondcategory; reconfiguring a system comprising of the one or more assets ifthe RUL is categorized as being in the second category; adjusting thecurrent mission of the one or more assets if the RUL is categorized asbeing in the third category; and scheduling maintenance for aftercompletion of the current mission if the RUL is categorized as being inthe fourth category.
 8. The method of claim 7, wherein adapting thecontroller of the one or more assets comprises adjusting one or morecontroller settings.
 9. The method of claim 7, wherein reconfiguring theone or more assets comprises one or more partially direct or indirectredundancies.
 10. The method of claim 7, wherein adjusting the currentmission comprises one or more of replanning and rescheduling one or moremission tasks.
 11. A system, comprising: a processor; and a memorystoring computer program instructions which when executed by theprocessor cause the processor to perform operations comprising:monitoring a health of at least one asset; estimating a remaining usefullife (RUL) of the at least one asset based on the monitoring;categorizing the RUL of the asset into categories comprising shorterthan a time to complete a current mission and longer than the time tocomplete the current mission; automatically performing one or moreremedial actions during the current mission if the RUL is categorized asbeing less than the time to complete the current mission, the one ormore remedial actions selected from initiating a fail-safe mode,adapting a controller of the one or more assets, reconfiguration of thesystem, and adjusting the current mission of the one or more assets; andscheduling maintenance for after the current mission of the at least oneasset if the RUL is categorized as being greater than or equal to thetime to complete the current mission.
 12. The system of claim 11,further comprising: determining if a fault of the one or more assetshave occurred based on the monitoring; and categorizing the RUL of theasset into categories based on the determination that a fault hasoccurred.
 13. The system of claim 11, wherein categorizing the RUL intocategories comprises categorizing the RUL of the asset into at least afirst category, a second category, a third category and a fourthcategory based on the remaining RUL.
 14. The system of claim 13, whereincategorizing the RUL into categories comprises: categorizing the RUL ofthe at least one asset into the first category if remaining RUL is lessthan or equal to a first threshold; categorizing the RUL of the at leastone asset into the second category if remaining RUL is greater than thefirst threshold and less than or equal to a second threshold;categorizing the RUL of the at least one asset into the third categoryif remaining RUL is greater than the second threshold and less than orequal to a third threshold; and categorizing the RUL of the at least oneasset into the fourth category if remaining RUL is greater than thethird threshold.
 15. The system of claim 14, wherein at least one of thefirst threshold, the second threshold, and the third threshold aretunable.
 16. The system of claim 14, wherein the third threshold isbased on the time to complete the current mission.
 17. The system ofclaim 14, further comprising: initiating a fail-safe mode if the RUL iscategorized as being in the first category; adapting a controller of theone or more assets if the RUL is categorized as being in the secondcategory; reconfiguring a system using direct or indirect redundanciesif the RUL is categorized in the second category adjusting the currentmission of the one or more assets if the RUL is categorized as being inthe third category; and scheduling maintenance for after completion ofthe current mission if the RUL is categorized as being in the fourthcategory.
 18. The system of claim 17, wherein adapting the controller ofthe one or more assets comprises adjusting one or more controllersettings.
 19. The system of claim 17, wherein reconfiguring the systemof the one or more assets comprises one or more partially direct orindirect redundancies.
 20. The system of claim 17, wherein adjusting thecurrent mission comprises one or more of replanning and rescheduling oneor more mission tasks.
 21. A non-transitory computer readable mediumstoring computer program instructions, the computer program instructionswhen executed by a processor cause the processor to perform operationscomprising: monitoring a health of at least one asset; estimating aremaining useful life (RUL) of the at least one asset based on themonitoring; categorizing the RUL of the asset into categories comprisingshorter than a time to complete a current mission and longer than thetime to complete the current mission; automatically performing one ormore remedial actions during the current mission if the RUL iscategorized as being less than the time to complete the current mission,the one or more remedial actions selected from initiating a fail-safemode, adapting a controller of the one or more assets, reconfigurationof the mission, and adjusting the current mission of the one or moreassets; and scheduling maintenance for after the current mission of theat least one asset if the RUL is categorized as being greater than orequal to the time to complete the current mission.
 22. Thenon-transitory computer readable medium of claim 21, further comprising:determining if a fault of the one or more assets have occurred based onthe monitoring; and categorizing the RUL of the asset into categoriesbased on the determination that a fault has occurred.